[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and snapshots [WAS: Re: Why the dramatic increase in filesystem performance when usingxfs????]
- From: Greg Freemyer <greg freemyer gmail com>
- To: Kristina Clair <kclair gmail com>
- Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans sgi com>, LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm redhat com>
- Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] XFS and snapshots [WAS: Re: Why the dramatic increase in filesystem performance when usingxfs????]
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:51:00 -0500
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:36:45 -0500, Kristina Clair <kclair gmail com> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > xfs_freeze -f "$SCRATCH_MNT"
> > [ $? != 0 ] && echo xfs_freeze -f "$SCRATCH_MNT" failed
> > (
> > lvcreate --snapshot --size 1G --name scratch_snap "$VG/scratch"\
> > > /dev/null 2>&1
> >
>
> I'm confused. I've gotten the impression from other posts to this
> list that one should not use xfs_freeze before creating snapshots.
> The reason being that xfs_freeze suspends the filesystem, and then
> lvcreate will also attempt to suspend the filesystem...
>
> ???
>
> Kristina
>
Kristina,
I was not clear.
I posted about a working snapshot test script for LVM1 / 2.4 kernel / XFS.
It has not yet been tested with the 2.6 kernel at all, and I know
nothing about LVM2.
I was looking for feedback about obvious changes to the syntax between
LVM1 and LVM2. Do they even use the same command names?
Your statement about xfs_freeze being a problem may be true and if so
would be the first known (to me) incompatibility in the script.
Nathan, is there a bugzilla about xfs_freeze causing problems witht he
2.6 kernel?
Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]